|
Post by paultp on Mar 8, 2011 14:42:18 GMT
Paul Take a look at the Returns procedure and format on the RYA web-site. I've rummaged round the RYA site and can't really find a full explanation. Bits are included all over the place but there isn't a "this is how it is worked out" page. One page said they took results over three years into account and I'd like to know what a club annual return looks like too. I've downloaded the spreadsheet that you can put race results in and may see what that unearths. I'd really like to understand how the PY's are worked out and how much data is available for each class. I'd like to understand the reasoning behind the decision but I don't know what the process is or what data is being used.
|
|
|
Post by the black pig on Mar 8, 2011 14:53:11 GMT
From the above it would seem that if they only get a few returns they go back to previous years and include more until they have "enough" to work out a PY. Presumably if they keep reusing the same returns year after year plus a few more, they will always decide to reduce the PY.
[/quote]
the way i understand it is that they allways use three years worth of returns, but it is weighted in favour of the newest returns. also the fastest and slowest returns are not used.
hope this helps.
duncan
|
|
|
Post by paultp on Mar 31, 2011 7:59:04 GMT
I attended a talk at Ripon SC last night by Bas Edmonds (RYA Technical Manager) on the PY system. It was quite interesting and really opened my eyes regarding how PYs are set, what the annual returns consist of and what the new online system of reporting can provide clubs and the RYA. I'm not going to go through all the detail but the revelation for me was what he said about annual returns. Only 90 clubs submit annual returns and of those only about 15 actually adjust the PY of any class at their clubs. The RYA only adjust a PY if the clubs adjust them on their annual returns. So any change to the BM PY is being done at club level. The RYA just publishes a guide of what is being used but most people think it is a set of numbers set in stone that they must apply. They did accept that adjusting PY numbers locally was an emotive subject and a difficult job for someone at any club but that is how the system is designed to work - the clubs tell the RYA what PY they are using for each class and the RYA publish a national list of numbers. The annual return only gives a few bits of information for each class (no of boats, no of races, rig set up, PY used at club) and this is used to build up a data set for the RYA. If clubs change a class's PY then the RYA does too, obviously if there are loads of clubs returning for a class and only one or two adjust that class's PY then those adjustments are not seen as significant as most clubs make no adjustment. The online system gives clubs and the RYA more information and can be used to suggest a PY for a class at a specific water depending how that class performs against other classes. It also allows the data entered by the club to be built up to form the annual return from that club. So as far as the BM PY is concerned, if only 4 (ish) clubs are sending in returns (as has been suggested) - if one of them adjusts the PY locally this will probably cause the RYA to consider that adjustment significant given the low amount of data they have to work with and so they will adjust the BM PY. Now, our club sailing sec said he didn't bother with a return because of all the work needed to collate race results to complete it when they didn't actually adjust any PYs - a nil return he called it. Bas pointed out that the club not adjusting PYs is data that they need, particularly where there is a good number of boats from a particular class. If they only get returns from clubs adjusting PYs then those classes will always have their PYs adjusted. The other myth exploded was the one about clubs returns not counting. They use all the data they get so if your club put in a return, that data was included. They may go back over a number of years to get a better data set but they include all the data that they get. So the way to try and safeguard the BM from further PY falls is to do one or more of the following: 1. Make sure your club puts in a return and includes the data about no of boats, no of races etc for a class. 2. The clubs that adjust the PY of the BM should be asked why and how they arrive at the adjusted PY. 3. Try to get your club to use the online system of uploading race results as it is capable of suggesting a PY to be used locally and also cuts down the annual collation of data needed to fill in the annual return. If some clubs adjust the PY down, most clubs don't change it and others even adjust it up - the overall picture would be that the PY would not need adjusting. Ripon are going to start using the online system this season although they have had the capability for a couple of years. The online system is found at www.pys.org.uk. Historical data can be put into the system too as the more data entered - the more accurate the suggested local PY. If every club where BM's sail put in a correct return then at least we would know that the PY we got reflected what was in use nationally rather than just reflecting what is in use at a few clubs. Cheers Paul
|
|
|
Post by the black pig on Apr 1, 2011 2:25:23 GMT
hi paul. i was going to point you in the direction of chris g, to clear up some of the points you have made, but i see you have already been in contact with him on another forum. chris is a great bloke and will always try to help. i hope he has cleared any misunderstanding.
for my part, the more i look into py system the more it makes my brain hurt!!!!! i am just glad the handicap for my boat(supernova) does not seem to cause trouble.
regards duncan
|
|
|
Post by paultp on Apr 1, 2011 9:25:20 GMT
hi paul. i was going to point you in the direction of chris g, to clear up some of the points you have made, but i see you have already been in contact with him on another forum. chris is a great bloke and will always try to help. i hope he has cleared any misunderstanding. for my part, the more i look into py system the more it makes my brain hurt!!!!! i am just glad the handicap for my boat(supernova) does not seem to cause trouble. regards duncan Hi Duncan, The thing about the PY system is that as I found out more about it, it seems more haphazard. The RYA rely on clubs for data while the clubs rely on the RYA for accurate PYs - neither is getting what they want from the other. To base each seasons PY on returns which only ask "what PY did you apply?" and "what PY do you propose?" is a quite frankly a nonsense when the majority of clubs don't put returns in and/or don't adjust. There is no real check on how any adjustments are made either; clubs don't have to back up an adjustment with real data from race results. It favours large classes over small classes too. How many returns will contain data for one or more lasers or enterprises or GP14s? How many will contain data on the British Moth (or any other small class)? So the laser PY is decided by looking at loads of returns with loads of boats and races; any anomalies in adjustment will disappear amongst the mass of non adjustments. The RYA will always get enough data even though most clubs don't send in returns. Whereas the BM PY is decided on returns from a very few clubs, some with only the odd boat. A disproportionate number of these clubs adjust to suit there own (often unique) conditions and circumstances. In doing so they effectively set the national PY. Which class is going to get the more accurate national PY? The more I look at and understand the system, the more flawed and (to use an army term) noddy I think it is. Unfortunately we are stuck with it until the PY is based on actual race data which is what it should be.
|
|
|
Post by paultp on Oct 26, 2011 8:05:12 GMT
The sailing secretary at my club made some obtuse remark about annual returns and the Streaker PY the other week which prompted me to collar him about his intentions for the BM.
I doubt I'll get him to recommend an upward adjustment but as long as the club puts a return in and it includes a reasonable number of races for my moth, then even if it just says "PY applied 1164, PY reccomended 1164" then that might help keep the PY from falling again, it will at least contribute.
So a heartfelt plea goes out to you all: Please try and make sure that your club puts a return in that includes the BM. The more returns the RYA get, the more likely that the PY will not drop particularly if a return includes a number of boats.
Unless the return is done online, the ONLY information that the RYA use is "PY applied" and PY recommended". So an upward recommendation is the preferred option if you can justify it but even if it is just what the PY is now (1164) that will help offset the 2 clubs that recommend every year that the PY be dropped.
To those clubs that always recommend a reduction in PY, would it be possible to recommend a no change, even though you locally adjust? So your return looks like "PY applied 1155" and "PY Recommended 1164"
Although the PY system is a nonsense it is the system in use and so we should endeavour to use it to try and return the PY to something competitive. Action is needed now by all clubs where BMs are sailed.
Cheers Paul
|
|
|
Post by the black pig on Oct 26, 2011 18:59:52 GMT
the most important thing is to get returns from open water clubs ( on windy days!!!!!!! ) also it would be good if some british moths could take part in some of the big handicap events over the winter.
|
|
|
Post by paultp on Nov 4, 2011 9:54:40 GMT
the most important thing is to get returns from open water clubs ( on windy days!!!!!!! ) Actually that isn't the most important thing at all, the most important thing is to get clubs to just submit a return. At the moment one club with a significant number of boats submits a return that states they apply a PY of 1155 and also recommend a national PY of 1155. Because so few clubs submit returns this is seen by the RYA as significant. The reality is that clubs don't submit returns because they think they have to sit down and work out what PY they should recommend to the RYA having applied 1164 this season. If every club where British Moths sail submitted a return which stated that for X number of boats the PY applied was 1164 and the PY recommended was 1164 - this would make the 1155 recommendation look less significant to the RYA, which may mean the PY does not drop again. Stopping the continual drop of the PY is the most important thing rather than trying to fiddle the system to get it raised. I'm trying to do this at Ripon but I am only one boat at one club.
|
|
|
Post by the black pig on Nov 4, 2011 11:33:44 GMT
hi paul.
sorry to go over old ground again, but the most important thing is the raw data, not what yardstick is at your own club. ie the time spend on the water.
it is this data that is used to work out the yardsticks.
thats why the returns have to be handicap races not pursuits, which is what we sail at my club.( the only way moth sailors at my club can affect the yardstick would be by sailing one of the big winter open handicap races)
at the moment most of the returns(not that there are many!) are from river clubs on light days. they win, our yardstick gets harder, because they have spend less time on the water than the boats behind them.
i agree we need more returns, but whats the point of putting in more returns from this type of club that will make our yardstick even harder.
what we need are returns from open water clubs were the boat is not so suited and returns from windy races where moths tend to lose to 'pointy shaped' boats. also another problem is a lot of moth sailers only use them on light wind days and sail other boats when its its windy, this also distorts the yardstick.
the couple of river club will keep putting in their returns what ever we do or say, all we can try and do is balance it out a little.
regards duncan
|
|
|
Post by paultp on Nov 4, 2011 19:02:30 GMT
hi paul. sorry to go over old ground again, but the most important thing is the raw data, not what yardstick is at your own club. ie the time spend on the water. it is this data that is used to work out the yardsticks. Hi Duncan, You're right that it should be race data that is used to work out what the yardstick should be, but that is not how the RYA work out the published Yardsticks. The RYA expect clubs to either use raw data to work out a PY or supply the raw data through the online system so a PY is suggested. The reality is that hardly any clubs do either of these things. The RYA assume that figures on returns have been arrived at via calculations from race data but they make no checks. They use the return figures plus whatever has come out of the online system to calculate the yardsticks. That is what the guy from the RYA told me at the start of the season at a talk they did at Ripon. It is also what I have seen from the data used to produce the PY. As most clubs don't bother returning (or calculating) the only data the RYA get is from the few clubs that do return. Last year for the BM they used data from only 3 clubs (9 boats and 73 races) plus what they had received in the previous 2 years (7 clubs, 21 boats, 151 races in 2009 and 5, 19, 247 in 2008). In 2008 one club's return for the BM recommending an increase in PY offset the 2 clubs recommending a reduction and I believe the PY did not drop at the start of 2009. It dropped in 2010 and 2011 because the clubs applying (and recommending) a low PY were not offset. What I'm saying is that, as far as the RYA is concerned, the figures on a return about each class is what sets the PY. Clubs don't have to calculate anything if they don't want to, they just have to submit a return stating for each class; no of boats, no of races, PY applied, PY recommended. If every club with BMs did that with PY figures of 1164 and 1164 it would probably stop the PY dropping next season. Whether this system is wrong or right is frankly not relevant, it is the system in use and it isn't going to change anytime in the near future. As a class we should therefore attempt to ensure that as many clubs as possible put in returns stating at least 1164 as a recommended PY in order to offset the small number of clubs (probably only one this year) that apply and recommend a low PY. A higher recommended PY would be great too. All I'm doing at my club is trying to get them to submit a return as they were under the impression that they didn't have to as they don't adjust PYs.
|
|
|
Post by paultp on Mar 5, 2012 15:11:07 GMT
Noticed the new PY list was out: www.rya.org.uk/racing/Pages/portsmouthyardstick.aspxThe good news is that the PY hasn't dropped this year! Hurrah! Bizarrely, neither has the Streaker but the growing Solo fleet at Ripon will be disappointed to see a further decrease of 3 this year.
|
|